Cited by 1,463Health disparities and outcomesAging, Health, and DisabilityAging and Gerontology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 131 of the 131 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 65 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Social isolation, loneliness and health in old age: a scoping review

Open access
Courtin, Emilie, Knapp, Martin·2017·Health & Social Care in the Community

Abstract

The health and well-being consequences of social isolation and loneliness in old age are increasingly being recognised. The purpose of this scoping review was to take stock of the available evidence and to highlight gaps and areas for future research. We searched nine databases for empirical papers investigating the impact of social isolation and/or loneliness on a range of health outcomes in old age. Our search, conducted between July and September 2013 yielded 11,736 articles, of which 128 items from 15 countries were included in the scoping review. Papers were reviewed, with a focus on the definitions and measurements of the two concepts, associations and causal mechanisms, differences across population groups and interventions. The evidence is largely US-focused, and loneliness is more researched than social isolation. A recent trend is the investigation of the comparative effects of social isolation and loneliness. Depression and cardiovascular health are the most often researched outcomes, followed by well-being. Almost all (but two) studies found a detrimental effect of isolation or loneliness on health. However, causal links and mechanisms are difficult to demonstrate, and further investigation is warranted. We found a paucity of research focusing on at-risk sub-groups and in the area of interventions. Future research should aim to better link the evidence on the risk factors for loneliness and social isolation and the evidence on their impact on health.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/hsc.12311

Cites

131 of 131 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 65 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 94 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 58
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 33
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
86 of 86

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Four full-text papers are unaccounted for

    Major

    Subtracting the 156 excluded full-text articles from the 288 accessed leaves 132, not the reported 128 included articles.

    Reported 128 · recomputed 132

  • Social-isolation share of depression studies is misstated

    Minor

    The three social-isolation studies are 9.375% of the 32 depression studies, not 16%.

    Reported 16 · recomputed 9.375

  • Mortality percentage in the outcomes table is understated

    Minor

    Six of the 121 studies in Table 4 amount to about 4.96%, which rounds to 5% rather than 4%.

    Reported 4 · recomputed 4.958678

  • Loneliness share of depression studies is misstated

    Minor

    Table 5 lists 26 loneliness-focused studies among the 32 depression studies. Their share is 81.25%, not the table's 75%.

    Reported 75 · recomputed 81.25

  • Depression focus categories omit one study

    Minor

    The three focus counts in Table 5 add to 31, although the paper reports 32 depression studies.

    Reported 32 · recomputed 31

  • Cross-sectional study percentage does not match the review total

    Minor

    The 68 cross-sectional studies are 53.125% of the 128 included studies, rather than 52%.

    Reported 52 · recomputed 53.125

  • Loneliness-focused depression study counts disagree

    Minor

    The narrative says 25 depression papers examined loneliness, while Table 5 lists 26.

7 of 7

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 131 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Cattan, 1998, Developing evidence base health promotion for older people: a systematic review and survey of health promotion interventions targeting social isolation and loneliness among older people, Internet Journal of Health Promotion, 13, 1
  2. Theeke, 2010a, A current state of the science on loneliness and the health of older adults, Gerontologist, 50, 3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Courtin, E., & Knapp, M.
Affiliations
  • London School of Economics and Political Science; Personal Social Services Research Unit; London UK
  • London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Venue
Health & Social Care in the Community
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-12-28
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
799-812
ISSN
0966-0410 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W292445073
Cited by
1,463
References
131
Citations by year
2026: 164 · 2025: 175 · 2024: 179 · 2023: 207 · 2022: 219 · 2021: 235 · 2020: 167 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 4
FWCI
3.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health & Social Care in the Community (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
social isolation, loneliness, older adults, health outcomes, depression, cardiovascular health, well-being, causal mechanisms, intervention, risk factors
MeSH terms
Aged, Health Status, Humans, Loneliness, Mental Health, Risk Factors, Social Isolation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review